The freedom of UK media to publish pictures of children may have been curtailed after a landmark ruling by a High Court judge.
Musician Paul Weller sued Associated Newspapers after unpixelated pictures of his children appeared on the Mail Online. Last year, judge Mr Justice Dingemans awarded Weller’s children – 18-year-old Dylan and two-year-old twins John Paul and Bowie - £10,000 in privacy damages, which Associated Newspapers challenged.
The group claimed that the decision was, in effect, creating an “image right”, adding that it would have far reaching adverse effects on the freedom of the UK media.
However, today, the Master of the Rolls Lord Dyson, Lord Justice Tomlinson and Lord Justice Bean dismissed the appeal and refused permission to appeal to the Supreme Court.
Children in the UK have the right to privacy, with these rights giving them much higher protection that those of adults. However, when you are the parent of a celebrity, it seems magazines feel that they have the right to take and publish photos of anyone.
However, use of images of children in publications without their parents’ permission can be seen to amount to a misuse of private information - which this ruling shows. The ruling also highlights that it’s not just young kids who are off limits, teenagers are also out of bounds.
This means all children and young adults who are in situations of a reasonable expectation of privacy - such as a family day out with their famous parents - are protected
This is not the first time action has been taken against publications over the privacy of children. In fact, when Prince George was just a baby, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge sought legal action against two freelance photographers after they monitored the youngster’s routine.
